Faith vs Belief

[robvalue]

@Anima: You don't need to "have faith" to be an atheist, as far as I can see. The only faith you could say is that the internal message I receive which informs me that I am not convinced about god claim(s) is the correct message. Assuming it is correct, I am an atheist. I kind of have to assume what my brain tells me I believe/disbelieve is what I really believe/disbelieve, but that's more of a pragmatic assumption than faith. Of course, it could be wrong. As Jim Jeffries said, I think I'm here debating you lot. But I could be in a white room somewhere, staring at a wall shouting, "Guns! Guns!"

Being an atheist says nothing about claims of knowledge. It's simply about the state of mind; disbelief. Trying to analyze the reasons for that disbelief is where it gets complicated; but that is not atheism, it's an attempted justification for atheism.

Where does the faith come in? I'll read a link if you want, but a summary in your words would be preferable.

I would similarly say, before anyone jumps all over my ass, that you don't need faith to "be" a theist. It's a state of mind. It may be reasonable that the justification may require faith as an explanation, but that again is not theism. And it's not the only explanation. There could be any number of weird ideas people have. You do not choose to believe things, you either believe them or you don't. You can of course lie about what you believe.

The point I'm making is that the state of mind and the proclaimed justification for that state of mind are two different things. The first is out of your control, and that is atheism/theism. The second is where you have control, but it may not be accurate even if you think it is your real justification. So unless you say that to "be an atheist" you are required to give justification, then I don't see where the faith comes in. And no one is required to give justification, or to even have consciously thought about it at all.